Do you think IdahoFallz.com is Liberal or Centered, and Why?
If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to the newsletter or RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
I hear lots of complaints. Daily. I usually figure hearing equal complaints from both sides of these aisles while the monthly visitor counts keep rising must mean all is generally going well regardless of the criticisms. I try to keep a long term perspective here.
Being that IdahoFallz.com garners a large number of out-of-area visitors looking for information about Idaho Falls, I take the site’s larger role more seriously than at first. I try to be conscientious of how our Idaho Falls is presented to the world via IdahoFallz.com.
Swear words have been blocked from the beginning, and that right there puts IFz in a more respectful zone than any of your television channels.
We developed comment guidelines to eliminate name-calling and personal put-downs. That right there puts IFz in a more respectful zone than any of your radio talk shows.
Finally last week, all religious discussion was banned because it always devolved into bitterness and the bad karma infected other discussions. We have plenty of things to discuss besides swearing, name-calling, and religious banter, right? I sincerely hope so, for the sake of our city!
The point of all this is what got to me today: someone again saying IFz is a liberal blog. They claimed that yesterday (Monday April 23rd I’m guessing?), Neal Larson (a local conservative talk show host on one of Frank Vandersloot’s Riverbend radio stations) was asking for liberals to call in, and supposedly someone called and said to look to IdahoFallz.com since it was such a liberal blog!
I have to admit the IFz average audience probably runs a little left of center. I say this after several weekly polls indicating a center-ness that clearly was not reflected in our last election. Our area is very right of center on average, so being generally in the center at IFz is to be left of center.
However, let me challenge any and all local conservatives who view IdahoFallz.com with any disdain or disgust: how did IFz come to be left of center?
The site has always been open to locals to write about local topics. Comments are obviously always free without any registration. How would a political balance be achieved at IFz when our area is remarkably right of center?
A long time back I actually took considerable time and expense to create and print formal invitations. I mailed them out to several prominent local conservative folks, including Mr. Frank Vandersloot himself. None were returned, and I’ve gotten signs indicating these conservatives did check out IFz at least once. Why then did they not try to participate in IFz and help shape local discussions?
I can only come up with two conclusions of how IFz has come to be left of center: they do not want to play on a playground that they do not control.
The second idea has stuck in my craw for several months, and I have had several indications over these months that it is true. I think it’s ironic that today’s guest mentioned the remark on yesterday’s Neal Larson Show, and tonight when I loaded the NLS feed yesterday’s show is missing! It goes from Friday to Tuesday’s show, unless I’m mistaken. Interesting…
So my challenge to conservatives: come forth and engage. If you can avoid name-calling, swearing, and religious discussion, you are most welcome to participate here. Please help us see the more conservative philosophy.
One of my favorite things at IdahoFallz.com has been the conversations. It is best when you are engaging in several discussions at once, and realize you are agreeing with someone in one thread and disagreeing with the same person in another, and on and on.
IdahoFallz.com has really boiled down to the content of what people are saying rather than the quality of who a person is here, and I view that as a huge success. It was one of my goals when starting the site. I would like to see more conservatives engaging in our discussions. I think it comes down to them venturing out of their comfort zone, and trying to understand why people say things they do not like, instead of just damning them for their viewpoints (ala Fox News).
How can IFz become more accommodating to conservatives across southeast Idaho? I have tried to extend invitations and hospitality to conservatives, and I am either ignored, told IFz is hostile to conservative beliefs, or I am informed a particular conservative plans to steal my idea and create their own version. Does my playground theory make sense? This playground cannot be controlled, so another one must be built. I think it is more tragic than ironic.
Please come play with us.
What do you think?
If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
Comments
Vote:
0 
0 I think this is a very middle of the road blog. It just gets called a liberal one because so much of the population around here is extremely conservative. So anything even remotely centrist is going to seem liberal to them.
Vote:
0 0 I think it depends on the topic.
I’ve never listened to Neal Larson. So he can be downloaded to an MP3? I’d like to do that, if possible, since I’m totally in the dark on him.
Knowing nothing about Neal Larson, his show or even what station carries him, I’ll just say his name seems to come up here a lot. I’m not sure why that is, merely an observation on my part.
With all due respect, if a caller says something on his show, is that caller/comment any more or less important than another caller on another talk show?
I don’t have a bias, as I’ve never heard him. I simply wonder if this is a host who does a lot of prep for his show, or relies more on callers etc.
Joe, how about inviting Neal to write a guest article for here of why he thinks IFz.Com is liberal? Maybe that would clarify some vague terms.
Joe wrote, “A long time back I actually took considerable time and expense to create and print formal invitations. I mailed them out to several prominent local conservative folks, including Mr. Frank Vandersloot himself. None were returned, and I’ve gotten signs indicating these conservatives did check out IFz at least once. Why then did they not try to participate in IFz and help shape local discussions?”
I’m an oldtimer here. I know what Joe wrote above is 100% accurate. Joe use to discuss some of his plans of how to invite different segments of the community to participate here.
I remember the invitations and even the cool cards. Maybe, Joe, it’s because the site has grown mostly by word of mouth and you receive virtually NO support/donations from your users (although there is a link asking users to help support this site). Consequently, maybe some others are confused how you can keep it the site open without financial backing.
Those are just a few ideas to get people talking. But, I will serve as a witness to the efforts Joe made a year ago (and earlier) to get people from all aspects of life and politics involved.
For example, look at Bill Shurtleff’s articles. Look what Joe tried to do, starting in 2005.
Vote:
0 0 This site is an open forum for the community. It will reflect the opinions of those that choose to participate. The moderation is not based upon political or world view, but on maintaining healthy and productive discussion about relevant matters in our community.
From what I have seen, the views of the participants on this forum are very diverse. I enjoy reading all the points of view and sometimes they challenge me and sometimes I challenge them. It is a good example of open minded discussion, which is essential for a healthy community.
Vote:
0 0 I have been a regular visitor of IFz for several months now. I agree with a previous comment that IF is so conservative that anything in the center would be considered liberal. However, I have also realized that many (not all) of the regular posters appear to be left of center with discussions about “child free zones”, “animal rights”, etc. Also, banning certain topics (i.e. religion) shows another liberal bias. Typically liberal people believe in free speach and are the first to cry for constitutional rights when they feel they are not allowed to express their opinions about anything. However, as soon as conservatives talk or attempt to express opinions, the topic is bannned or the opinion is not allowed.
Overall, the IFz site has been very helpful to me, a new arrival in IF. However, the people, opinions, and policies of the site are anything but conservative. I believe moderate to liberal would be a better label.
Thanks.
Vote:
0 0 Good points.
Neal Larson is unlikely to contribute here, as his boss is constructing their own playground. And it’s too bad, I think Neal has a lot of smart and insightful things to say, it’s too bad he is leashed.
I was looking through our chronological archives for articles that could be considered liberal or conservative
http://idahofallz.com/article-archives
I actually found many I think are conservatively-oriented.
I think it’s important to look beyond the articles and into the comments. The articles really are the tip of the proverbial iceberg here, where comments run into the hundreds sometimes.
I’m surprised to hear banning religious discussion could be viewed as a liberal bias, I would have thought it seen more as a conservative bias in “protecting” a dominant conservative religion. Interesting.
Have we had animal rights discussions here? I don’t recall any, unless you refer to the wolf discussion. That had mixed comments from both sides. Please keep in mind for that article, an ultra-liberal website linked to us and sent over their hoardes, so that one is not as reflective of Idahoans as most other IFz articles.
I recall a Doonesbury cartoon a few years back. A liberal is talking to a conservative, and cons. tells the lib. they will never accomplish as much as consv.’s do. The reason is that libs. want to hear so many viewpoints that they talk and listen forever, then talk more and more to reach consensus. The consvs. do not want to hear many viewpoints, so they will trust their leadership to quickly make a decision, then they focus more time on executing the plans.
Do you think that is an accurate or inaccurate portrayal?
Vote:
0 0 I get the notion that people have no idea what it means to be liberal or conservative, and make their judgments based on this wacky Bill O’Reilly Culture-War garbage. Look, Conservative and Liberal, in the context we are discussing, are political affiliations and have more to do with fiscal and social policy than personal values. If you’re judging the site based on personal values, stop. It’s an arrogant, pompous thing to do. But if you’re looking to get a feel for the political climate of the site, here’s an argument that it’s actually very Conservative:
1) Taxes. Almost all members of this site are against new taxes and overtaxation, a defining trait of Conservatism since the first Republicans hundreds of years ago.
2) Social Programs. While opinions differ, most site members are against wasteful social programs such as welfare. You’ll find that many of us would be for privatizing the Social Security system. Again - Conservatism advocates personal responsibility over the need for the state to care for its inhabitants.
3) The Right to Choose. Oh okay, this is one of those things that people who are propagating the whole “Culture War” garbage like to say is a leftist belief, but how progressive is it to let people live their lives however they choose? It’s actually very conservative, and on the scale of political affiliations, lies on the far-right (where you’d find “Libertarianism”), as opposed to the far-left (Where you’d find “Socialism”).
4) The Constitution. You’ll find that most site members (myself included) believe the Constitution to be the supreme law of the land of this nation, and should be interpreted, without agenda. This nullifies the concept of activist judges and erosions of liberty - again, a very Conservative idea.
So if you want to judge me personally for being pro-choice, go ahead. I’ll accept it and gladly debate the issue. If you want to judge other site members for their personal beliefs, that’s fine. It’s actually your problem and I hope you get over someday.
But as for the site as a political forum, it’s very Conservative, whether or not you want to martyr your political affiliation with yet another “liberal media” demon.
Vote:
0 0 Holy cow! This place has been accused of being “liberal”??????????????
Are you SURE, Joe? Are you sure they didn’t say “library” and you misunderstood the word?
I’m not being all that sarcastic here, but - okay - a LITTLE teeny bit maybe.
Tee hee hee.
I’m extremely liberal for this neck of the woods (I’m actually more “progressive” but since I outright call myself a tree-hugger I’m automatically considered liberal - so - okay, I’ll bite).
Just DON’T ever call me a Bush supporter - blech.
If there really ARE lefties on IFz - by all means let me know who you are - I feel like I’m the only registered dem in the entire east part of the state.
Well.
I guess what I mean is - I have never gotten the idea this place is liberal - ever. I think it’s a pretty decent blend of interesting and intelligent people with some wise opinions and insights - but - I’ve never once gotten the idea we’re a liberal bunch.
Maybe it’s me, Joe. Maybe my boisterous opinionating is messing with the curve!
Frankly - I have to be honest here - if conservatives WANT to avoid this forum I’m absolutely okay with that. I do not go one single day without hearing about how wonderful the Bush administration is - I’m @ the point where I’m starting to come right out and verbalize my sentiment (which is - “What is WRONG with your thinking?”)
So if conservatives want to stay away, I won’t mind. Though I will say in general it IS true that the more the merrier - and in a normal world I don’t mind conversing / arguing with conservatives @ all. It’s just that - well - ther are SO many of them in this valley and so few progressives / liberals.
As for the “liberal media” - WHERE? FOx News? CNN? All those wonderful formats that let each individual in the USA know that GWB muttered the words “Money trumps peace”?
Where is this liberal media conspiracy I keep hearing about? Really - I’ve heard of this mirage for decades and have yet to see hide nor hair of it.
Good thread, Joe.
Vote:
0 0 I think Joe makes an excellent point with an earlier comment.
If one only reads the titles to the articles, there is no guarantee the reader knows the true content (those are my words, not his exact words). But, I believe there is a lot of truth in that thought.
In a similar way of thinking, personally, I have skipped the “R” topics, after I got tired of seeing people verbally rip each other apart. And there are other subjects I’m simply not interested in. I’m glad others are and it shows the readerships diversity enough to have so many different articles.
I totally understand how I could look at a title and not know what the contents of the original or subsequent comments were.
And, I reamin puzzled why anyone needs to label this site with a given label. Like all MEDIA, I believe most people can find portions of what they are looking for, and always elements with which they disagree.
My good “e-friend” Jeremy and I disagree about Bill O’Reilly, and that’s fine with me. I will be PRO O’Reilly on this site and any other, given his work on Jessica’s Law. He recently took Gov. Otter and other Govs to task for not having tougher child protection laws. I say good for O’Reilly.
But, I know that Jeremy most likely won’t label me with a label, except pro- child protection (AND I’LL BE PROUD TO BE CALLED THAT by anyone at any time!).
So Jeremy and I may have a little bit different views about O’Reilly (and perhaps our previous experience seeing him on ABC, NBC, or reading his work from Boston, Portland etc. contribute), but I don’t know that makes either or us more “left or right” overall.
I think we both want truth and we both want children protected.
Maybe it boils down to where our reference points were when we first signed on this site.
And, I absolutely believe where we are in life, both age and experience wise, contributes. Some ideas I thought were ok when I was 18 or 25 I don’t think are ok when I became the co-owner of a business.
There was a reader who has written one article, when Jerry Brady was running for office, that would absolutely label me the most extreme right person he’d ever encountered on this site, based on less than 2 hrs. of chatbox talk. He worked for Brady and I was sick of polticis, so I asked if we could talk about anything BUT Politics that night. Yet, my request was labeled as being “anti-Brady” or “anti-Democratic,” which was NOT my intent. This person and I had never discussed MY VIEWS of who was running for election and would receive MY VOTE.
I asked that reader to please pick another topic, as I was so tire dof politics, and I’d gladly chat with him. I remember the subject of Mac computers came up and I encouraged him to share his knowledge of other subjects besides politics, on this site. He assured me he would. But, to this day, he has never written another article, nor visited with his real name.
So perhaps some of us look different on different days. I get sick of all the politics by Oct. and want a “refuge site” free of politic debate that doesn’t specifically pertain to our area.
Yet, at other times I’ve been labeled a liberal here by others who didn’t necessarily know what I was discussing.
I think it is a very dangerous practice to decide the views of others. If one is comfortable, ask that person, don’t assign them labels.
More importantly, try to have more than one interaction with them. Someone I would have thought may have been more liberal than I in many issues has had a very similar viewpoint as I have, on most issues.
CLARIFICATION: In the articles I’ve read, this other reader and I appear to have the same viewpoint. Perhaps if I read all the articles I would have a different answer.
Ultimately, I still wonder if it goes back to our backgrounds and our daily responsibilities more than any political affiliations.
What do you think?
Vote:
0 0 Go George Bush. Keep up the good work.
Vote:
0 0 “But, I know that Jeremy most likely won’t label me with a label, except pro- child protection (AND I’LL BE PROUD TO BE CALLED THAT by anyone at any time!).:
But that’s just because I’m anti-child, remember? 
Vote:
0 0 Actually, the liberal label confuses me as well. I am a middle of the road conservative in most areas, a definite conservative in others (usually those associated with fiscal issues), and definitely liberal when it comes to civil rights which is an issue usually associated with the left. Given the positively venomous remarks that follow any suggestion that I make that an individual’s civil rights out to be respected, I would have labeled the readership as quite conservative myself. After reading this thread, I would say you have folks of all sorts here.
Vote:
0 0 It might be sometimes just difficult to tell on this site.
I came from a VERY conseravtive part of Los Angeles and it seems like a “bastion of liberalism” compared with what I’ve experienced in Idaho.
Granted I live north of you guys (north of Rexburg even) but despite what the rumors say - St. Anthony and Ashton are not nearly as devout (can I say “faithful”) as many south of here think. We’re more like rowdy cowboys and beer drinking fun-loving rednecks around here.
St. Anthony and Ashton ARE very conservative though - although I will shamelessly admit we used to have a party-hearty mayor in St. Anthony.
Liberals and progressives - if you really ARE here, consider coming out of the shadows more!
Thanks!
Vote:
0 0 Gypsy, there is a “Drinking Liberally” group here in Idaho Falls that meets I think every Wednesday?
Let’s see, we link to their site from the IF links page…
Ok here: http://idahofalls.drinkingliberally.org/
It sounds like you might enjoy their company, and get advice on starting your own upper valley group. I’ve not been to one of their get-togethers, but they sound like fun.
I appreciate the comments here. I am glad to hear general consensus that IFz is probably more moderate than area some area conservatives might think.
I notice that local conservatives (excepting regular visitors) have not taken my challenge and visited and tried to share their perspectives.
Probably all waiting for their new playground to get built?
For all the complaints about restrictions at IFz (swear words and religious talk), how restrictive do you think a conservatively-oriented discussion site will be? How much leash room do you think you will have there to criticize certain well-known people in Idaho?
Vote:
0 0 I consider myself a social liberal and political conservative. That is all.
Vote:
0 0 Joe -
You are da man. Thanks for that link! I have already commited myself to checking that out next Wednesday (I go to IF every Thursday now, but I could change it to Wednesday).
For the record, I don’t think restricting swear words is such a bad idea - you have written that sometimes kids come here, so for the purpose of THAT it seems reasonable that foul words should be saved for private emails and so forth.
Religion - ahhhh you know, to me that’s a horse of a different breed. Not many can live in Eastern Idaho and stay numb on topics concerning faith. More and more that’s becoming increasingly true on Capitol Hill - and lo and behold it is usually the conservatives who create the religious interference, then it’s those VERY same conservatives who insist we not tromp all over their “religious freedoms”.
I think not openly discussing religion is dangerous - it could eventually lead us back to a Dark Ages.
Vote:
0 0 Political views ARE directly related to personal beliefs. Did you miss something Jermey?
Vote:
0 0 Are they now? Can I be pro-choice and anti-abortion? I sure can - while I can hold a belief that abortion is morally incorrect, I can support a public policy that allows each individual the right to make up their own mind and act according to their own conscience.
I can believe that drugs are immoral and still not believe that government should outlaw them. I can favor restriction in my own personal life and unabashed freedom in public policy.
Because I don’t believe that my personal beliefs should ever, ever EVER be forced on someone else, regardless of how right I believe them to be.
Vote:
0 0 Hey Jeremy, are you an SP or a traditionalist?
Vote:
0 0 I’m a Jeremyist. I believe everything a Jeremy believes.
What’s an SP? Social Progressive? Not really - I mean, I believe people should be able to live their lives however they choose without the control of the State. So I guess that would put me on the more progressive side of the spectrum.
Vote:
0 0 Jeremy: What if a woman gets pregnant as a result of a violent rape? Would you still be against that woman having an abortion?
You can’t have your cake and eat it to by being pro choice AND anti abortion. Sorry, but that makes no sense whatsoever.
Vote:
0 0 Sure it makes sense. One can be against abortion as their own personal beliefs, but willing to let others make their own choices about their own bodies/lives.
Say I’m against abortion, what right do I have to tell the lady in your example she can’t do what she deems right or necessary? It’s her body, her circumstances, her choice and I should agree with what she ultimately decides even though it may violate my personal beliefs.
Vote:
0 0 I certainly can. That woman can do whatever she wants - and I’m the last personal qualified to make another person’s decisions or judge them on their decisions. You know how I can be anti-abortion and pro-choice? I don’t have an abortion. Easy enough, cuz I’m a guy. I’ve never had to decide whether I want a child to come out of me or not … so how the heck am I supposed to answer your question?
Next time I get raped and it gets me preggers, I’ll let you know what my decision is.
Vote:
0 0 Jeremy,
Print this out and save it for your kids. Someday, they may find it interesting to read how many people thought you were anti-kid.
I won’t write anything else to you, Jeremy, directly as I don’t want YOU to be the theme here, vs. the CONTENT of Joe’s question. That being said, let me address the rest of comments to Joe.
Joe,
I do have a couple of other ideas where some of the labels may be coming from. But, because I see this discussion in this thread rapidly going in a direction that I don’t want to be a part of, I will e-mail my thoughts to you privately.
I did see a couple of things this a.m. that made me rethink what apparently was said on Neal Larson’s show. In just looking at the site, I did see a couple of things that may give some people their perception of liberal or whatever the specific claim was.
I also have a couple of suggestions of how to address what I saw, so those who won’t read beyond comments in the comment box (some of which you and I, along with others, have had to remove given how inappropriate they were for anyone to read), or the titles of certain articles, could get the wrong idea of YOUR intentions here.
I know there have been very conservative people who have posted here. How much they just use the anonymous or guest options now, I have no idea.
In fairness, from some of the postings about a year old, I can honestly see why in certain themes (most of which YOU shut down), others could claim IFz.Com was liberal.
Also in fairness, I would ask anyone who has made that claim to review Joe’s process for revisions to the site. He asked for input from EVERYONE about what was and wasn’t appropriate.
Per chance someone read articles that are several months old, I would ask you to please re-read the process and comments of those who bothered to be involved with making sure Idaho Fallz.Com was user friendly for everyone.
I believe Joe started this new discussion in Feb. 2007 so new policies could be established.
Also, for those who think the site is liberal (which is different than individual viewpoints), could you please cut and paste them in this thread so we all could review them. As I’ve said before, I don’t read every topic written.
I might well agree some comments are very liberal, or very conservative. But, it is the author’s right to express his/her own opinion whatever it is. I’m not forced to read or even agree with anything anyone else writes. They are individual POV.
I do think it is important to differentiate between an individual viewpoint vs. the intent of the site and Joe.
Vote:
0 0 I have to agree with many of the posts from the readers. The posts show that everyone still has varying points of view and we are still a diverse group. What a wondderful place IFZ is.
It appears that JeremyPlo is a SP. Nothing wrong with that, but it is certainly left of center. However, many of Jeremy’s ideas show that perhaps he would prefer a more open society where people choose right or wrong based on their own personal beliefs. No need for the government to tell us what is right or wrong or enforce laws designed to control the general public. I agree with this except most people are incapable of functioning in this type of situation. Perhaps Jeremy can and would be the leader of our new “free thinkers, free actors” club, but the idea simply wouldn’t work. Laws (whether they be moral laws, laws of our country, or God’s laws) are created to control people and keep them on the right track. It’s too easy to say that “I believe blah blah blah, but no one should tell me what to do.” Try to tell that to someone who has a family or friend who was killed as a result of irresponsible behavior of another, such as drunk driving or drug usage. Tell them that you morally oppose drug use and you are sorry people die as a result, but that the government has no right to enforce drug laws or arrest people for driving under the influence. Come on Jeremy, you are smarter than that.
Thanks.
BTW, JeremyPlo, you aren’t anti-child, you just don’t have any life experience yet. I agree that you should save your posts. Perhaps you can show your kids the posts while sitting down to a nice meal at a local eating establishment.
Vote:
0 0 Okay, but driving drunk is different than just consuming the product - for example, let’s use marijuana. No, no, not actually use it, let’s talk about it. Okay, use it if you want to.
Decriminalizing marijuana doesn’t mean people are going to be sitting around on street corners with hookas, passed out after eating too many Twinkees. Just like with alcohol, if we legalize narcotics, it gives us the ability to regulate it - let’s not forget that until recently, it was perfectly legal for someone to drive while stoned in Idaho.
My point is this: perhaps we can make concessions on our right to drive drunk in the interest of public safety - indeed, it seems only reasonable to do so. What’s not reasonable is to continue a prohibition that creates more violence, keeps our prisons full, and gives more power to cartels and drug lords, all because we don’t really understand marijuana.
Nobody ever said we should rid the law books - that’s just not, and I can’t use this word enough, reasonable. What I am saying is that laws should be in the interest of maintaining liberty, not destroying it.
ps Enough about me not having any “life experience”. I may have seen and done a lot more than you know. In fact, I used to be a very liberal person at one time - a self-professed Communist, in fact. It is life experience that has formed my ideals as they are. So let’s talk ideas, not trash on me because I don’t have a second mortgage yet.
Vote:
0 0 OK. I will concede that you are not as far left as I thought. However, your comments have led me to believe that your views are more liberarian than anything.
BTW, I loved your comment about the second mortgage (haha).
Vote:
0 0 “because we don’t really understand marijuana.”
I could not disagree more.
We understand the merry weed quite well. Here’s a major reason why we still allow for violence and so forth in the “underground” pot industry. There is more money to be made in the care and feeding of a “drug war” than there is to be made in decriminalizing marijuana.
How, pray tell, would the government tax pot if you can grow it in your own home without being fined for it?
There’s MUCH more money to be made in “just say no” and creating a freaking government sponsored industry around drugs than there is in just saying “yes” to decriminalization.
Follow the money. Where have I read that before? Oh yeah, I wrote it on this forum a few times already.
Vote:
0 0 Jeremy the liberarian. I can picture him shushing people and busting up the make-out session in non-fiction Rn-Sa. Oh wait, I bet you meant libertarian.
I guess I have never really understood the point of wasting so much time trying to define and classify ourselves.
liberal
conservative
democrat
libertarian
republican
traditionalist
social progressive
pretentious jerk
quasi-liberal
quasi-conservative
liberal conservative
progressive
regressive
flip-flopper
bush-lover
bush-hater
centrist
right
left
up
down
southwest
north northeast
Aren’t there more important things in life than a stupid name tag?
Vote:
0 0 Liberians are from African Liberia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberia
It means “Land of the Free”.
Kind of similar to Libertarian.
Vote:
0 0 davin-
Spot on as usual.
Except, are you sure it wasn’t the drama area of the library?
Vote:
0 0 I’d hate to propagate the whole definitions debate, but Johnny, a libertarian is actually on the far-right of what’s been called the Political Spectrum - so perhaps the site is too conservative for your tastes, rather than too liberal?
Vote:
0 0 My bad for the typo.
Let us not forget that the new and improved political spectrum is not linear. The libertarians may be more “right” than “left”, but that would be an unfair comparison without the modern chart, which includes areas that extend beyond the traditional right and left.
Check your chart, Jeremy, Also, please throw in a couple of lines from your quote book in your next post. I have missed that part from your last few posts.
Goddess Bless.
Vote:
0 0 Kay, I’ll just stick to my own opinion, which is far more effective than words of wisdom from great people. After all, the best opinion is an uninformed one, right?
Vote:
0 0 According to you, perhaps.
Vote:
0 0 Hey folks, I’m thinking that Bill Richardson looks like real good as a candidate. Am I wrong?
Vote:
0 0 He will be the 3rd one to quit, he has no real following. Lots of baggage and skelatons that will come out if he stays in longer
Vote:
0 0 Richardson is an interesting character. He has alot of experience at the United Nations…which can also be a liability…and as Secretary of Energy. However, he got snowed in 1996 by North Korea on the deal Clinton brokered with the North to shut down their weapons program….This would come back to haunt him as being naive. He also does not have a large financial following. I think Richardson is unique in that he seems to speak more diplomatically than most Democrats…but this also hurts his ability to fund raise by being an ideologue and that will be his undoing.
Vote:
0 0 It’s been several days now, and I have not noticed an increase in Republican or conservative-minded visitors.
Our visitor count is ever increasing, but I do not notice any increases in conservative comments.
I have not noticed anyone using the ‘email this article to a friend’ feature to tell their conservative friends, family, co-workers, etc. about IFz and invite them to share their perspectives and help balance out IFz.
I have not noticed any conservative blogs mention this discussion.
I appreciate the conservatives who do visit and who do add their opinions and perspectives to the mix. They are important and help balance everyone out.
Unfortunately, I again think of my playground analogy: they don’t want to play here unless one of them own it?
I challenge our local conservatives one more time:
Think of 2-3 conservative-minded people right now, people you know who you have not talked about IFz with. Resolve to email them, Instant Message them, phone call them, or visit them and tell them about IdahoFallz.com, this discussion, how the site is geared towards southeast Idaho discussions, and how I personally challenge them to come here and engage in some discussions.
Maybe I’m saying “put up or shut up” about IFz being overly liberal?
Vote:
0 0 Joe -
I STILL don’t know how on earth you’re coming up with people who think this forum is too liberal - for heck’s sake, look how many people DO NOT want religion talk here?????????? Liberals tend to enjoy discussions of ALL natures, that’s one reason why we are “liberal”. Freedom of thought, freedom of speech, that kind of thing.
Liberals like things talked freely about. That’s why so many of us have liberal slogan t-shirts and bumperr stickers.
I STILL maintain this isn’t a liberal place, but it COULD be that SOME of the conservatives are embarrassed to admit themselves as such. These days, I don’t blame them!
Vote:
0 0 Liberals talk freely, my butt. Who invented political correctness to control language? Liberals. But I’m not pointing fingers. Okay, yes I am.
Vote:
0 0 Holy Cow! For once I agree with Jeremy! Gypsy, I gotta call you out on that one:
“Liberals tend to enjoy discussions of ALL natures, that’s one reason why we are “liberalâ€. Freedom of thought, freedom of speech, that kind of thing.
Liberals like things talked freely about.”
There are so many cases of attempted suppression of speech on college campuses….I experienced that first hand when conservative speakers were heckled off campus and not even allowed to speak….try the most recent examples of students not allowing the Minutemen to speak at Columbia University in New York a few months ago.
Hey, this should get things going in this thread:
How about Al Sharpton being a demagogue shutting down nasty speech of Imus while still spewing his own brand of racially charged terms like: “White men were still in caves while we were building pyramids.”?
How about MSNBC and CNN providing their own slanted view of things, admittedly just like Fox News!!!
Seriously, both sides are taking prisoners….we have more confrontation than communication going on. Liberals don’t have the moral high ground on this issue anymore than Conservatives do!
Vote:
0 0 How about the recent gay group that was kicked off the campus of BYU?
Liberals (as a voting choice) tend to engage in a lot of free speech activities. We LIKE free speech. Can I speak for EVERY liberal or EVERY college? Of course not. But as a liberal, I enjoy free speech.
Period.
Period.
Take it or leave it.
Vote:
0 0 Does BYU take public tax dollars? versus the University of Utah…I don’t think they do. Me thinks they have every right to prohibit certain types of speech on private grounds….just like you wouldn’t want Sean Hannity sitting on your lawn telling you what a good guy President Bush is! haha
Vote:
0 0 Liberal voters and liberal thinkers tend to be open to free speech. Liberal is defined as being pro-free speech.
You disagree with that.
Okay then. I respect that and don’t wish to engage in any further ancedotal “yeah buts”.
Ther are exceptions to everything - including a “community discussion” site that won’t permit discussion on a topic that is HIGHLY “community oriented” in IDaho Falls.
We all have our hypocricies I guess.
Have a nice night.
Vote:
0 0 Gypsy - You ma be pro-free speech, but that’s your view, not a typical liberal view. Which is why I usually shy away from saying “I am liberal” or “I am conservative”. I like to say I’m an American who stands for the things that Americans should stand for.
It’s actually so much more simple than liberal or conservative.
Vote:
0 0 I agree with Jeremy on this one. I hate being labeled one or the other.
Vote:
0 0 I think for eastern Idaho it’s a fairly middle of the road website. Other areas of the country it would be very conservative, yet others - far too liberal.
Perhaps it is a representation of the balance that exists in the greater IF area. In other words, I think it represents our population pretty reasonably.
Vote:
0 0 Most people who know me think i am conservative. It’s not so much of a thing where i won’t coment if it libral, so much as i don’t have much time. But then again i realy a Heinleinist not so much of a conservative! If people say this place is libral then they should post the other side of the storie!
Vote:
0 0 Maybe I’ve gained an insight here.
Maybe liberal-minded people like to discuss these things and present new ways to look at it, though to the point of beating a dead horse where viewpoints aren’t really being changed anymore.
Maybe conservative-minded people figure they are not going to change anyone else’s mind and they aren’t going to change their own mind, so they give up early.
Maybe these two tendencies lead to liberals being viewed as lacking common sense and conservatives being viewed as being closed minded? Stereotypes?
What do you think of this observation? Close? Far off the mark?
Vote:
0 0 You may have something there. Although, I don’t think its so much a “liberal/conservative” thing.
Rather, most people simply don’t like disagreement or confrontation. They’d rather watch than participate.
Has more to do with personality and human nature than with political leaning.
In addition, in a reasonable homogeneous community like IF, those in the majority don’t see the need for “unnecessary” discussion. Things already, more or less, suit them. There’s nothing to talk about.
Therefore, since the majority tend to be right of center politically, posters here will tend to be left of center. And those of us that are right of center here, will likely be perceived by the majority as a bit off the wall as well.
Did that make sense?
In other words, I don’t think this site is “shunned” by conservatives because it’s “too liberal”. I think they have other, more comfortable options available to them.
Vote:
0 0 I think you have made some interesting points Ace (and you to Joe). But, I think that Ace has brought a new way of looking at this.
I’m know there have been conservatives post here in the past. As someone wrote today in the Chatbox (and these are my words, not those of the person), The discussions got too angry and people focused on how to tear others down than the subject so I stopped visitng IFz.Com.
I believe the words I’ve written above, as I’ve had at least 3 previous users e-mail me with those exact thoughts.
The good thing is Joe is trying to present a reasonable community site that doesn’t go on which hunts after any one. Consequently, some who use to enjoy being here are returning as the “R” discussion and so many inappropriate remarks have been stopped.
Joe, I wonder if there is a way to invite Neal Larson to cruise the site again? I know you’ve sent e-mails etc. Probably I know more than most users how you’ve bent over more ways than most people can turn, to accomodate all that you can.
Probably by just having this discussion, you’ll raise a higher profile on that show (and elsewhere). After all, those who monitor your site daily for their organizations are looking for trends.
One thing No One can deny is you made a decision and have stuck to it.
Vote:
0 0 Being a liberal Idahoan, I personally think this site is centered.
Vote:
Vote:
One point. If you look at other Idaho blogs, you’ll notice most of their sidebars contain link lists titled ‘liberal idaho blogs’ and ‘conservative idaho blogs’.
I have noticed IdahoFallz.com is NEVER featured in either of these lists.
Thankfully we are often linked from them, but usually under ‘interesting’ or ‘other idaho sites’.